list in directory join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More
Return To: HR Policy Index

ARBITRATION SAMPLE

If an employment dispute arises while you are employed at the Company, we require any such dispute to be settled exclusively by binding arbitration under the federal Arbitration Act. Any dispute associated with employment, termination of your employment, discrimination, harassment, etc. will qualify for arbitration resolution. This arbitration shall be the exclusive means of resolving any dispute arising out of your employment or termination from employment and employees in any court or any forum can bring no other action.

By simply accepting or continuing employment, you agree that arbitration is the exclusive remedy for all disputes arising out of or related to your employment with the Company. In addition, both the Company and you agree to waive all rights to a civil court action regarding your employment and the termination of your employment. Only the arbitrator, and not a judge nor a jury, will decide the dispute.

If you decide to dispute an alleged incident during your employment, you must deliver a written request for your decision to arbitrate to the HR Department. You will have up to one (1) year from the date of termination, or one (1) year from the date on which the alleged incident(s) or conduct occurred to make such request. You will also have up to fourteen (14) calendar days to respond to each communication from the Company regarding the selection of an arbitrator and the scheduling of a hearing.

If the Company does not receive a written request for arbitration from you within one (1) year, or if you do not respond to any communication from the Company about the arbitration proceedings within fourteen (14) calendar days, you will have waived any right to raise any claims arising out of the original issue.

The arbitrator will be selected by both parties from a list of available representatives. You and the Company shall each bear respective costs for legal representation at any such arbitration. The parties, if any, shall share the cost of the arbitrator and court reporter, equally.
Commentary
Also referred to as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), arbitration is becoming more popular as a trusted means to quickly and fairly rectify issues without sacrificing employee's rights. When binding arbitration is used as the sole method for resolving legal conflict, costs are generally less and the resulting decision is available without delay.

Due to today's litigious society, more employers are choosing to include Arbitration in their workplace policies. Those interested should contact an attorney familiar with the Uniform Arbitration Act who can assist with arbitration compliance in their state.
Lawyer Login: Workipedia • EL Match

Auto-login Show name as online

Forgot your password?I Want To Participate!

Ogletree Deakins | Indiana | Indiana Enacts Right-to-Work Law: Becomes the Only Right-to-Work State in the Central Midwest (February 02, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | New Mexico | Santa Fe Local Ordinance Sets Country's Highest Minimum Wage Requirement (February 02, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | A Moving Target: The California DLSE Modifies Again Its FAQs on California's New Wage Notice Required for Hourly Employees (February 01, 2012)

Jackson Lewis LLP | Indiana | Indiana Adopts Right-to-Work Law (February 03, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | Is Rounding of Employee Time Entries Legal in California?--California Supreme Court Orders Appellate Court to Decide (January 31, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | California Court of Appeal Finds Employees Are Exempt Under California's Commissioned Sales Exemption (January 31, 2012)

Ford & Harrison LLP | New York | New York's Wage Theft Prevention Act Requires Notice to Employees (January 30, 2012)

Ford & Harrison LLP | California | Class-Action Antitrust Complaint Alleging an Unlawful Employer "No-Poaching" Conspiracy Appears to Have Survived a Motion to Dismiss (January 30, 2012)

Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP | Delaware | Delaware Court of Chancery Issues Guidelines for Attorneys (January 31, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | Pennsylvania | Pennsylvania Court Holds That Trustees May File Mechanics’ Lien to Obtain Delinquent Contributions to Health and Pension Funds (January 30, 2012)